Current research and quality improvement efforts show potential for improving quality and outcomes for older women

2000 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Quality And Outcomes

scholarly journals Quality improvement in general practice: what do GPs and practice managers think? Results from a nationally representative survey of UK GPs and practice managers

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e001309
Author(s):  
Jennifer Gosling ◽  
Nicholas Mays ◽  
Bob Erens ◽  
David Reid ◽  
Josephine Exley
Keyword(s):  
General Practice ◽  
Quality Improvement ◽  
General Practitioners ◽  
Service Improvement ◽  
Protected Time ◽  
Routine Work ◽  
Professional Interest ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Nationally Representative ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundThis paper presents the results of the first UK-wide survey of National Health Service (NHS) general practitioners (GPs) and practice managers (PMs) designed to explore the service improvement activities being undertaken in practices, and the factors that facilitated or obstructed that work. The research was prompted by growing policy and professional interest in the quality of general practice and its improvement. The analysis compares GP and PM involvement in, and experience of, quality improvement activities.MethodsThis was a mixed-method study comprising 26 semistructured interviews, a focus group and two surveys. The qualitative data supported the design of the surveys, which were sent to all 46 238 GPs on the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) database and the PM at every practice across the UK (n=9153) in July 2017.ResultsResponses from 2377 GPs and 1424 PMs were received and were broadly representative of each group. Ninety-nine per cent reported having planned or undertaken improvement activities in the previous 12 months. The most frequent related to prescribing and access. Key facilitators of improvement included ‘good clinical leadership’. The two main barriers were ‘too many demands from external stakeholders’ and a lack of protected time. Audit and significant event audit were the most common improvement tools used, but respondents were interested in training on other quality improvement tools.ConclusionGPs and PMs are interested in improving service quality. As such, the new quality improvement domain in the Quality and Outcomes Framework used in the payment of practices is likely to be relatively easily accepted by GPs in England. However, if improving quality is to become routine work for practices, it will be important for the NHS in the four UK countries to work with practices to mitigate some of the barriers that they face, in particular the lack of protected time.

Quality and outcomes of care for older women with chronic disease

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 178-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn M Clancy ◽  
Arlene S Bierman
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Disease ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Outcomes Of Care ◽  
Quality And Outcomes

scholarly journals Association of air quality improvement with slower decline of cognitive function in older women

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (S10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Younan ◽  
Xinhui Wang ◽  
Joshua Millstein ◽  
Andrew J Petkus ◽  
Daniel P Beavers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Air Quality ◽  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Air Quality Improvement

Do cancer centers need to assess quality and outcomes? Introducing a customized ACS-NSQIP for oncology (Onc-NSQIP).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 475-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Y. Bilimoria ◽  
X. Wang ◽  
M. E. Cohen ◽  
B. L. Hall ◽  
K. Richards ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Regression Models ◽  
Operative Procedure ◽  
Surgical Oncology ◽  
The Other ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Cancer Centers ◽  
Acs Nsqip ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Assess Quality

475 Background: To identify quality improvement opportunities, hospitals can use ACS NSQIP to compare their risk-adjusted performance to other hospitals. However, Cancer Centers have few opportunities to compare their outcomes to similar hospitals for oncologic operations. Our objective was to develop an oncology-specific version of ACS NSQIP (Onc-NSQIP) and determine whether it could be useful for Cancer Centers. Methods: From ACS-NSQIP (2006-2009), patients undergoing major colorectal (n=34,858; 221 hospitals) and pancreatic (n=7,667; 65 hospitals) as well as esophageal, gastric, and soft tissue operations for malignancy were identified. Risk-adjusted postoperative outcomes were assessed with regression models adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and operative procedure. Relative rankings of NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers in ACS NSQIP among the other ACS NSQIP hospitals were compared. Results: Cancer Center outcomes varied widely for colorectal and pancreas. For overall colorectal morbidity, Cancer Centers were ranked in the top third (n=4), middle third (n=7), and bottom third (n=10). For colorectal 30-day mortality, Cancer Centers were ranked in the top (n=14), middle (n=3), and bottom third (n=4). For overall pancreatic morbidity, Cancer Centers were ranked in the top (n=5), middle (n=7), and bottom third (n=7). For pancreatic 30-day mortality, Cancer Centers were ranked in the top (n=5), middle (n=6), and bottom third (n=8). Similar results were observed for colorectal and pancreas for DVT/PE, SSI, reoperation, and length of stay. Onc-NSQIP models were comparable to standard ACS NSQIP models. At least some Cancer Centers were statistical outliers for most outcomes (P<0.05). Results were similar for other malignancies. Conclusions: Cancer Center outcomes varied as much as other ACS NSQIP hospitals, demonstrating need for quality assessment. Without standardized risk-adjusted outcomes comparisons, Cancer Centers cannot accurately assess their outcomes to identify quality improvement targets. ACS NSQIP's new platform allows customization so hospitals can compare surgical oncology-specific risk-adjusted processes and outcomes. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals The Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Steven M. Bradley ◽  
Srinath Adusumalli ◽  
Amit P. Amin ◽  
William B. Borden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Care Delivery ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Outcomes Of Care ◽  
Care Systems ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
Care Innovation ◽  
Cardiovascular Care

Despite decades of improvement in the quality and outcomes of cardiovascular care, significant gaps remain. Existing quality improvement strategies are often limited in scope to specific clinical conditions and episodic care. Health services and outcomes research is essential to inform gaps in care but rarely results in the development and implementation of care delivery solutions. Although individual health systems are engaged in projects to improve the quality of care delivery, these efforts often lack a robust study design or implementation evaluation that can inform generalizability and further dissemination. Aligning the work of health care systems and health services and outcomes researchers could serve as a strategy to overcome persisting gaps in cardiovascular quality and outcomes. We describe the inception of the Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium that seeks to rapidly improve cardiovascular care by (1) developing, implementing, and evaluating multicenter quality improvement projects using innovative care designs; (2) serving as a resource for quality improvement and care innovation partners; and (3) establishing a presence within existing quality improvement and care innovation structures. Success of the collaborative will be defined by projects that result in changes to care delivery with demonstrable impacts on the quality and outcomes of care across multiple health systems. Furthermore, insights gained from implementation of these projects across sites in Cardiovascular Quality Improvement and Care Innovation Consortium will inform and promote broad dissemination for greater impact.

scholarly journals Heterogeneous associations of air quality improvement with domain‐specific cognitive function in older women

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (S10) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xinhui Wang ◽  
Diana Younan ◽  
Andrew J Petkus ◽  
Daniel P Beavers ◽  
Mark A Espeland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Air Quality ◽  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Air Quality Improvement

scholarly journals Building the First Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative, the CPQCC: A Historic Perspective

Children ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 177
Author(s):  
Jeffrey B. Gould
Keyword(s):  
Quality Improvement ◽  
Performance Improvement ◽  
Health Professionals ◽  
Neonatal Intensive Care ◽  
Perinatal Care ◽  
Quality Improvement Collaborative ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Public Health Professionals ◽  
Quality And Outcomes ◽  
And Performance

The California Perinatal Quality Improvement Collaborative (CPQCC), founded in 1997, was the country’s first statewide perinatal quality improvement collaborative. Our goal was to improve the quality and outcomes of perinatal healthcare in California by developing a collaborative network of public and private obstetric and neonatal providers, insurers, public health professionals, and business groups to support a system for benchmarking and performance improvement activities for perinatal care. In this presentation, we describe how viewing the CPQCC as a complex value-driven organization, committed to identifying and addressing the needs of both its stakeholder partners and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) members, has shaped the course of its development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document